Karnataka High Court
Smt. Draupadi W/O Harishchandra ... vs Smt. Basavanti Maruti Ghatti on 14 February, 2022
Bench: Sachin Shankar Magadum
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
RSA.NO. 5831 OF 2011 (PAR & POS)
BETWEEN
1. SMT. DRAUPADI
W/O HARISHCHANDRA GHATTI,
AGE: 73 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
R/O H. NO. 24, ASHOK NAGAR,
BELGAUM -590016
2. NARENDRAJIT HARISHCHANDRA GHATTI
AGE: 62 YEARS, OCC: ADVOCATE,
R/O H. NO. LIG-24, ASHOK NAGAR,
BELGAUM -590016.
3. SHASHIKANT
S/O HARISHCHANDRA GHATTI
AGE: 53 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O H. NO. LIG-24, ASHOK NAGAR,
BELGAUM -590016
4. MAHAVEER S/O HARISHCHANDRA GHATTI
AGE: 51 YEARS, OCC: SERVICE,
R/O H. NO. LIG-24, ASHOK NAGAR,
BELGAUM - 590016
5. VIJAYKUMAR S/O HARISHCHANDRA GHATTI
AGE: 66 YEARS, OCC: SERVICE,
R/O H. NO. LIG-24, ASHOK NAGAR,
BELGAUM -590016
6. SMT. SARITA W/O UMESH MAGADUM
AGE: 37 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
R/O H. NO. LIG-9, ASHOK NAGAR,
BELGAUM -590016
2
7. SMT. SAVITA W/O SUNIL SURYAVANSHI
AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
R/O ASHOK NAGAR, BELGAUM -590016
8. KUMARI . UMA D/O HARISHCHANDRA GHATTI
AGE: 31 YEARS, OCC: NIL,
R/O H. NO. LIG-24, ASHOK NAGAR,
BELGAUM -590016.
9. SMT. PRABHAVATI W/O ISHWAR GHATTI
AGE: 64 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
R/O BELGAUM DIST. BELGAUM -590016
10. ARUN S/O ISHWAR GHATTI
AGE: 51 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE AND PVT. SERVICE,
R/O BELGAUM DIST. BELGAUM -590016
11. AMAR S/O ISHWAR GHATTI
AGE: 49 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE AND PVT. SERVICE,
R/O BELGAUM DIST. BELGAUM -590016
12. SMT. BHARATI SIDDAPPA KODABALE,
AGE: 48 YEARS, OCC: SERVICE,
R/O BELGAUM DIST. BELGAUM -590016
13. MANJU S/O ISHWAR GHATTI @ ASHWIN
AGE: 43 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE AND PVT. SERVICE,
R/O BELGAUM DIST. BELGAUM -590016
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. V P KULKARNI, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. SMT. BASAVANTI MARUTI GHATTI,
AGE: 77 YEARS, OCC: NIL,
R/O BHIMANAGAR, CHIKODI,
DIST. BELGAUM -590016
2. SMT. SUBHADRA SHIVARAM KANAGALEKAR,
AGE: 63 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
3
R/O MAHANTESH NAGAR,
NEAR HANYNAB TEMPLE,
BELGAUM -590016.
3. ASHOK S/O MALLAPPA GHATTI
AGE: 61 YEARS, OCC: SERVICE,
R/O ESI DISPENSARY QUARTERS,
ASHOK NAGAR, BELGAUM -590016
4. DILEEP MALLAPPA GHATTI
AGE: 55 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE AND PVT. SERVICE,
R/O BHIMANAGAR, CHIKODI,
DIST. BELGAUM -590016
5. SUNIL MALLAPPA GHATTI,
AGE: 47 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE AND SERVICE,
R/O BHIMANAGAR, CHIKODI,
DIST. BELGAUM -590016
6. MAHENDRA MALLAPPA GHATTI
AGE: 49 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE AND SERVICE,
R/O BHIMANAGAR, CHIKODI,
DIST. BELGAUM -590016
7. SMT. GOURABAI MALLAPPA GHATTI
AGE: 62 YEARS, OCC: NIL,
R/O BHIMANAGAR, CHIKODI,
DIST. BELGAUM -590016
8. SHRIPATI SHANKAR BHOSALE,
AGE: 62 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O BHIMANAGAR, CHIKODI,
DIST. BELGAUM -590016
9. PUNDALIK SHANKAR BHOSALE,
AGE: 57 YEARS, OCC: GOVT. SERVICE,
R/O WANTMURI, TQ. CHIKODI,
DIST. BELGAUM -590016
10. SUBRAV SHANKAR BHOSALE,
AGE: 56 YEARS, OCC: GOVT. SERVICE,
4
R/O SHAHPUR, BELGAUM POLICE QUARTERS,
DIST. BELGAUM -590016
11. SMT. DRAUPADI HARISHCHANDRA GHATTI
AGE: 72 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK
R/O NO. 24, LIG, ASHOK NAGAR,
BELGAUM -590016
12. KALLAPPA S/O KADAPPA SURANAIK
AGE: 47 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O HALAKARNU, TQ. GADHINGLAJ,
DIST. KOLHAPUR, MAHARASHTRA.
13. SMT. SUGANDE SADANAND MANE,
AGE: 75 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O SHREE NAGAR, BELAGUM -590016
14. SMT. NALINI BALARAM YADAVE
AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O KALYAN, BOMBAY, MAHARASHTRA
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. OMKAR S UTTURE, ADV., FOR R1;
SRI. R.M. KULKRNI ADV., FOR R3 AND R9;
R4, R5, R6 AND R8 - SERVICE HELD SUFFICIENT;
R7, R11, R12 AND R13 - NOTICE SERVED;
THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC PRAYING
TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE PASSED IN
R.A.NO.166/2009 PASSED BY THE VI ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE,
BELGAUM DATED 03.04.2010 CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND
DECREE PASSED IN O.S.NO.148/2004 PASSED BY THE CIVIL JUDGE
(SR.DN) CHIKODI DATED 08.06.2009, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE
AND EQUITY.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
5
JUDGMENT
Counsel for appellants submits that he has filed a
memo requesting this Court to permit the appellants to
withdraw the appeal.
2. In the joint memo, it is stated that the matter is
amicably settled between the parties and the appellants do
not intend to prosecute the top noted appeal.
3. At this juncture, the counsel appearing for
respondents 3 and 9 objects the said memo saying that he
has no instructions from his clients, who has also signed
the joint memo.
4. The submission of the learned counsel is placed
on record. If appellants, who have questioned the
concurrent findings of the Courts below dismissing the suit
are intending to withdraw the appeal, no prejudice would
be caused to the contesting respondents. Infact it would
enure to the benefit of the respondents as the litigation will
be put to rest by withdrawal of this appeal. Joint memo is
taken on record and the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.
5. In view of disposal of the appeal, pending
interlocutory applications, if any, do not survive for
consideration and are dismissed accordingly.
SD/-
JUDGE
yan
